On 12/09/12 19:08, Santiago Pericas-Geertsen wrote:
>
> On Sep 12, 2012, at 11:50 AM, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>
>> I still haven't got an answer as to why this provider needs 'Type' and
>> 'Annotation[]' (knowing that we are talking about simple non-message
>> body parameters). Without these two parameters, the runtime can key
>> ParamConverters, and it knows Class<?> of such parameters.
>
> I think Bill may have pointed this out already. One example for
> Annotation[] is @Encoded. Isn't whatever built-in provider you have know
> handle to @Encoded for say @QueryParam? E.g.,
>
> @QueryParam("foo") @Encoded Foo f, ...
Hmm, yea, possible.
>
> As for generic types, JAX-RS 1.X already supports List<T>, Set<T> and
> SortedSet<T> for params, and the proposed signature seems consistent
> with existing ones.
>
> Having said I'm not sure about how multi-valued params would be handled
> by ParamConverter. Consider,
>
> @HeaderParam("Link") Set<Link> linkHeaders, ...
>
> Should I define a converter for Link (possibly called multiple times) or
> should I define a converter for Set<Link> (and that leads to other
> questions)?
>
Yes, this is what I was also doubting. In CXF the runtime manages the
collections. I don't think it makes sense to ensure the converters are
available for List, Set, [], etc
Unless we have something A<B> argument...
So let it be there
Sergey
> -- Santiago
>